Harold_V wrote: Doesn't make any of us good or bad, it just displays a common human weakness---the one that allows us to dream. Perfectly harmless until we start believing the dream, and our father-in-law has to give up his life as a result.

Harold

HAROLD,
Sorry to hear about your father in law, but, with respect, a father in law could have died an a multitude of different ways, (as could all of us) so it was no one's fault. Was the heart problem caused by the failed dream or was it likely to happen anyway? ( I have also suffered a heart attack by the way and so feel qualified to make this comment).

I believe that what happens in life could be likened to a box full of flies and if the lid was opened and a handful of gravel thrown in, there would be a lot of flies killed but there would also be a lot of survivors and so which flies died and which flies survived is random - (this all despite my mother always telling me that everything is pre-ordained!).
Whatever is thrown at us in life may be random, but we as mankind have the ability to think, (even dream) about possible ways of averting disaster, which is not true for the rest of the animal world.
If we look at the big picture we can see that nature is not random, it is keeping everything regulated, however brutal it may seem to us and it makes our abilities seem miniscule.

Dreaming is not a human weakness, rather it is a human strength because as well as the darker side where the failed dreams of some caused untold tragedies in the past, just as many people have been saved by the dreams and foresight of others throughout the centuries.

Sorry, I didn't mean to be a philosopher so I'll go back to my lathe, where despite being told that things can't be done I'll try them anyway! - an immense source of pleasure to a retired gentleman can be obtained from this machine.
Don't hold your breath for a breakthrough though, however many surprising discoveries have come about as a result of trying to do something else entirely!

Cheers, Will.

Last edited by wildun on Mon Dec 09, 2013 4:16 am, edited 2 times in total.

ken572 wrote:One of my on and off fun things to play with for the past 50 years has been building different types of perpetual motion magnetic motor’s. I have never succeeded 100%, but I have had some interesting outcome’s which leads me to believe that it might someday be made to happen. The most important thing to do is keep an open mind.Thinking out of the box can be very rewarding.

Ken.

I don't think that the magnetic motors that you describe can be concidered perpetual motion. Magnets degrade over time, much as the example given earlier with nuclear fuel. That being said, althought they may not be by defination perpetual motion, I think that they are as close as a person could get to perpetual motion and may be a potential source of energy. As far as keeping your mind open, I can't disagree with you there at all!

You aren't keeping an open mind by thinking anything is free--you're overlooking the fact that everything has losses, be they by electrical resistance or friction. So long as that exists, there can't be anything even remotely like perpetual motion. Whether you like it or not, that's simply the way things work in our universe.

Assuming one could suspend a bar in a vacuum, and assume one could accelerate that bar to a given speed, what would have been accomplished?
There is no perfect vacuum---so the bar will ultimately slow down and stop--it's just a matter of time until it happens. Further, if any attempt to extract energy from this spinning bar (object), what possible reason would it have to keep spinning? Less energy than it took to accelerate the object could be extracted before it came to a halt. Otherwise it's a free lunch, and there isn't one.

Will,
It was NOT my father-in-law who died. I was not a part of that episode, nor would I have been, as there would be no way you could get me to become involved in such a hare-brained scheme. By that, I trust you took note of the fact that I spoke of a head assay of the material. An assay would have prevented me, or anyone with common sense, from pursuing that venture, and that was my point about being properly informed, and not living in lala land. Said another way, you can look where the area is best lighted for your lost wallet, but you'll have more success looking for it where it was lost.

Lets talk a little about this scheme. While they harvested a little over five ounces of gold, overlooking the fact that one man died, how would you come to terms with the fact that they had to pay for equipment to pursue this venture? They didn't do it for fun--they did it for gain. They did it based on what they wanted to believe, not on fact. For them, it got expensive. A perfect example of individuals standing to benefit by being properly informed, and not ignoring what is known to be true.

That the gentleman who died would have, or not, isn't the issue. The fact is, BECAUSE he pursued a stupid idea, he was unable to get help when it was badly needed. He may have been near help had he not ventured to the desert, pursing what was a very bad idea. Whether you agree, or not, isn't an issue, and it doesn't really matter. The gentleman who lost his father-in-law certainly felt that way, at least by his account. He could see all of this clearly, but, sadly, only after the fact.

I don't think that the physicists who have gone before us are so naive as to not understand the laws of physics, at least in our universe, which dictate that perpetual motion isn't possible. It isn't possible because NOTHING operates without a loss--nothing. The sun isn't perpetual motion, but it's likely as close as you're going to get.

Common sense.

It's starting to look like it's not so common, after all.

Harold

Wise people talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.

Ok, I'll (try) to keep an open mind, but please do not ask of me to subscribe to nonsense. I don't believe in the Easter Bunny, either.

Mean time, please explain to me how you will address two issues. One of them is friction, the other is resistance. I'll leave alone the notion that you could harness this device and extract energy (which can't be done). Just satisfy the first two things---without a solution to which you CAN NOT achieve any device that works endlessly. It just can't be done, not in this universe, and that's not something you need an open mind to understand.

Harold

Wise people talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.

Harold_V wrote: It just can't be done, not in this universe, and that's not something you need an open mind to understand.

Harold

HAROLD,
Sorry I got the wrong end of the stick about whose father in law it was!

I'm sure you statements about perpetual motion are correct, (and I always have been sure) but isn't always being correct a bit dull and boring? - this issue at the moment is just an academic rant and nothing is being gained by getting an object to spin forever, or by being the winner of an argument for that matter.

It's easy to prove that it won't work of course but there's always that tiny element of doubt which inspires intrigue and hope.
The wise men of the day proved Gallileo wrong ie till it transpired that he was right, then they had to either concede (which the more sensible ones did), leaving the old die hards trying to prove their point and taking their bitterness to the grave! - it reminds me of the old steam train guys refusing to accept that diesels had any merit at all over "steamies".

I myself don't really believe that perpetual motion is viable ( sure brought the thread to life though!) but to me, thinking about it occasionally does make me feel like i've got a challenge and I don't care whether it is free or not, or whether the motion will last a lifetime or a million years - if I could have it for a lifetime I'd be more than happy, anything more is purely academic and really of no use to me!

So, using the "lifetime" context, I guess we already have our perpetual motion - not a freebie of course (and I never mentioned nor expected a free ride by the way).
Then the next hurdle to overcome will be human greed and that is really a bigger hurdle than "perpetual motion" itself and as long as there are human beings on the planet it will remain so!

If a free ride is someone's objective here, then all they will get is strife and the whole excercise is pointless, so we can forget that.

PS: and I do understand that what you are meaning by a "free ride" (before I'm corrected) may differ a little from my version.

Cheers, Will.

Last edited by wildun on Mon Dec 09, 2013 4:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

KEN and REDNECK,
I see you guys still retain that little glimmer of hope we all need to have - stimulates the mind and with luck will give us active minds right until we leave for that big workshop in the sky!
Cheers, Will.

wildun wrote:KEN and REDNECK,
I see you guys still retain that little glimmer of hope we all need to have - stimulates the mind and with luck will give us active minds right until we leave for that big workshop in the sky!
Cheers, Will.

Wil,
I guess, I forgot to say:

Welcome to The Home Machinist!

As you have already found, the combined membership

knowledge in this forum is unmatched by any other, I.M.H.O.

NOTE: It would be nice if you could put your EARTHLY LOCATION

in your PROFILE so it will show up under your name to the left of

all of your POST's.

It make's it nicer for the members reading your post's.

Ken.

One must remember.
The best learning experiences come
from working with the older Masters.
Ken.

ken572 wrote:
"One must remember.
The best learning experiences come
from working with the older Masters.
Ken."

KEN

Yes Ken, there is a lot of membership knowledge here and it's great.
Your favourite quote above is probably very true indeed, but the dilemma for a lot of people is that there are a lot of older people who are not masters, and it sometimes requires time to work out the difference between those who are the masters and those who are not, especially on a forum!!

Harold's quote ( which seems to have disappeared now) was also very true - to me, it basically meant don't talk unless you can prove what you are saying is true and that is of course good, but does tend to stifle opinion and opinion is what keeps the world going round.
If it is a bad opinion, then someone who knows more will quickly haul you up, sort you out and make you eat humble pie! - I accept that.
I do also accept that I can learn a lot from this forum and that there can be much better ideas for a solution to some specific problem than mine - if anyone has a sincere and honest opinion, then spit it out (in a nice manner) - but make it stick or you're mincemeat - that way we all learn!

HAROLD
I think there is a bit of grey area between the two types of people you talked about in your quote, (maybe I come from somewhere in that area?).
It seems that you have quite a lot of experience in practical engineering - I have quite a lot of skills from the past in this too, but I do feel you have a lot more than I have in the home workshop scene.
I'm not quite settled into my home workshop yet, but already, I find that it's not just the same when I have to actually cough up the cash for everything!

Anyway this is a good forum and thanks for the good communication from all you guys.

ken572 wrote:
"One must remember.
The best learning experiences come
from working with the older Masters.
Ken."

KEN

Yes Ken, there is a lot of membership knowledge here and it's great.
Your favourite quote above is probably very true indeed, but the dilemma for a lot of people is that there are a lot of older people who are not masters, and it sometimes requires time to work out the difference between those who are the masters and those who are not, especially on a forum!!

That's a common problem, often fueled by those who fancy themselves the equal of those who have pursued a given avocation for a lifetime. We see examples of that often, with some folks willing to argue about topics in which they are not well versed. No amount of explanation will have them understand that they are missing some important elements, thus they aren't able to grasp the errors of their ways.

Concerning the masters, it is generally true that, given enough time, they manage to betray themselves, exposing the fact that they aren't "masters", after all.

Harold's quote ( which seems to have disappeared now)

A fast check of the log doesn't indicate any edits to my posts. However, from your comment, I got the idea that it was my sig line to which you were making reference. "Wise people talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something."
It should still appear in my posts.

Assuming it was my sig line to which you were making reference, continuing with your comment:

was also very true - to me, it basically meant don't talk unless you can prove what you are saying is true and that is of course good, but does tend to stifle opinion and opinion is what keeps the world going round.

There's a fine line that separates opinion from fact. All opinions are welcome on this board, so long as they are posted politely, and without personal attacks, and are NOT presented as fact. That one chooses to believe something does not make it true.

If it is a bad opinion, then someone who knows more will quickly haul you up, sort you out and make you eat humble pie! - I accept that.

It is for that reason that we permit opinions. We simply must be careful to not allow opinions to be stated as fact, as some folks rely on this board, just as they do most any venue, as a source of information. I, in particular, try to prevent misinformation, and will often post when something controversial is offered. The topic of perpetual motion is a good example. We can all dream of such a thing--but the harsh reality is it isn't going to happen, not now, not tomorrow, not with things as we know them. You simply can not take more out of anything than has been put in. A given amount of energy is required to put a body in motion. Friction (both mechanical and eletrical) will absorb some of that energy, so the body has no alternative but to slow down, eventually coming to a stop, as the energy infused in the object will eventually have been totally absorbed by friction. It may take a week, or it may take seven years, but it is sure to happen, like it or not.

Now then, of what use would any device be if all it did was continue to move? The only logical way we can capitalize on such a device would be to harness energy---energy that has the potential to be lower than the energy introduced at the outset. What have we gained?

I do also accept that I can learn a lot from this forum and that there can be much better ideas for a solution to some specific problem than mine - if anyone has a sincere and honest opinion, then spit it out (in a nice manner) - but make it stick or you're mincemeat - that way we all learn!

Agreed. And, when an individual wishes to post something they hold dear, something that may appear to be illogical to those who think, it's not a bad idea to make mention that it is a belief they hold, that is is not, indeed, fact.

HAROLD
I think there is a bit of grey area between the two types of people you talked about in your quote, (maybe I come from somewhere in that area?).
It seems that you have quite a lot of experience in practical engineering - I have quite a lot of skills from the past in this too, but I do feel you have a lot more than I have in the home workshop scene.

In regards to my statement about types of people, it's really quite simple. I'm a very practical person, not driven by hare brained ideas. I have no formal education. I am a person of science, as it is the closest thing to reality that we have, like it or not. Science explains why things are as they are--we simply must be able to accept the facts as they have been presented, typically from folks who have no axe to grind, but are seeking truth. If a scientist has no dog in the fight, but draws conclusions from years of research, I am far more inclined to believe what he/she has to offer than the ravings of some irrational person.

In regards to the home shop, while I have one, I am not just a hobbyist. I spent 26 years running the machines for gain, 16 of them piloting my own commercial shop. That often unsettles some folks, as I tend to look at things from the perspective of a commercial machinist, not a hobbyist, and occasionally gather my share of flack as a result. My methods are often at odds with those of others, but I have to rely on what I learned, and what worked best under demanding conditions. I am NOT a fan of the old saw that there's many ways to skin a cat. There is generally one way that is superior to all the others, but some folks won't have their ways taken from them, not for any reason. They'll stick by decisions they've made, even if they tend to be troublesome. That's a lesson that has been slow for me to learn. Such folks often do not seek advice, but approval instead. They don't welcome advice, and see it as being antagonistic.

I'm not quite settled into my home workshop yet, but already, I find that it's not just the same when I have to actually cough up the cash for everything!

All too true! It generally takes years for a person to equip a shop to one's satisfaction. Don't know that you're ever really there, either. For example, I'd like to own a centerless grinder. I expect there's not one in my future, but I'd certainly like to have one sitting in the shop!

Anyway this is a good forum and thanks for the good communication from all you guys.

We're fortunate to have a good gathering of people on this board, which is directed by a person who prefers that all have a voice, but that we remain polite. I heartily endorse his method of operation, and try to reflect that in my approach to the board.

It's nice to have you here, Will. I thank you for your candor.

Happy New Year,
Will.

And to you as well!

Harold

Wise people talk because they have something to say. Fools talk because they have to say something.

Harold_V wrote:
It's nice to have you here, Will. I thank you for your candor.

Happy New Year,
Will.

And to you as well!

Harold

Thank you Harold,
I appreciate your point of view, you are very thorough,- I may disagree occasionally, but as I said, if my opinion is sometimes wrong, I can expect to be "jumped on" and sorted out big time, but don't worry, if you can take my questioning, I can take the consequences!

Meantime, here is a link on sleeve valves I found a while ago and although I don't understand all the stuff in it, I found it extremely interesting and I wonder if anyone has built a model engine based on this principle - anyone? http://www.enginehistory.org/members/ar ... Sleeve.pdf